Idaho
Environmental
Quality Profile
1984
-<$
State of Idaho
Department of Health & Welfare
Division of Environment
450 W. State St.
Boise, ID 83720
-------
John V. Evans
Governor, State of Idaho
Rose Bowman, Director
Department of Health and Welfare
Lee W. Stokes, Administrator
Division of Environment
AI Murrey, Chief
Water QuaIity Bureau
Robert Olson, Chief
Hazardous Materials Bureau
Kenneth Brooks, Chief
Air Quality Bureau
Cover: Pen and ink sketch done in 1970 by Dan Smede, Channel VI
Computer Graphics: By Susan Lowman, Division of Environment
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface ' '
Air Quality 2
Particulate Matter 5
Sulfur Dioxide 7
Carbon Monoxide 7
Lead 8
Hazardous Materials 10
Hazardous Waste 10
Resource Recovery I I
Solid Waste 12
Radiation Control 15
Vector Control 17
Water Quality 20
Drinking Water 21
Municipal Construction Grants 22
Point Source Pollution 23
Nonpoint Source Pollution 23
Quality of Idaho's Principal Rivers 24
Bear River Basin 26
Upper Snake River Basin 26
Southwest Basin 28
Salmon Basin 29
Clear-water River Basin 29
Panhandle Basin 29
Quality of Idaho's Lakes 30
Quality of Idaho's Groundwater 32
-------
PREFACE
Pollution control programs in Idaho are administered through the joint
efforts of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare and the United
States Environmental Protection Agency. The State/EPA Agreement,
developed each fiscal year by the two agencies, is a contractual
document which outlines work the Division of Environment and the
Environmental Protection Agency will perform, part of which is
supported by federal dollars.
This Profile is our way of providing the public with a current assess-
ment of environmental problems in Idaho and giving interested Idaho
citizens the opportunity to provide guidance in the planning process
for the FY 86 State/EPA Agreement (July 1985 through June 1986). We
are interested in knowing if there are environmental problems of a
higher priority than those described in this report. If you feel there
are, please supply us with sufficient information to be considered in
the planning process. Some questions that should be answered are:
- What are the most serious environmental quality problems
in Idaho?
- Where should we be directing our declining resources for
environmental cleanup?
- Are there better methods for tackling these environmental
problems?
- Do we need to place more emphasis on specific geographical
environmental problems areas? If so, where?
Please direct any comments, concerns or questions to:
Dr. Lee Stokes, Administrator
Division of Environment
Idaho Department of Health and Welfare
Statehouse
Boise, Idaho 83720
-------
AI R
QUALITY
BUREAU
-------
-2-
AIR QUALITY
AIR QUALITY STANDARDS--HI STORY AND DEFINITION
The first response to growing public concerns about air pollution in Idaho
was in 1959 when the State Legislature passed the Idaho Air Pollution
Control Act. This Act created the Idaho Air Pollution Control Commission.
However, Commission activities during the next eight years were limited by
funding which totalled only $31,000.
In 1967, the Air Pollution Control Act of Idaho was passed. This Act
repealed authorization for the Commission and established a new Air
Pol Iution Control Commission with increased funding to carry out its duties.
The new Commission, with cooperation of the State Board of Health and
Department of Health published the first Comprehensive Study of Air Pollution
Problems in Idaho which, in turn, supported the State's first set of rules
and regulations to control air pollution.
In order to consolidate State efforts to control air pollution, the
Legislature transferred all powers and duties of the Air Pollution Control
Commission to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) pursuant to
the Environmental Protection and Health Act of 1972. The Act also created
the Division of Environment within IDHW. Within the Division of Environment,
the Air Quality Bureau became responsible for delivering an effective program
that would: provide statewide monitoring of ambient air, analyze air quality
problems and prepare control plans, determine compliance with emission
regulations, inform the public and respond to concerns and determine
requirements for new sources of air pollution.
The first significant response to air pollution as a national issue occurred
in 1970 when Congress passed the Clean Air Act. Recognizing existing State
programs such as Idaho's, Congress found "— that the prevention and control
of air pollution at its source is the primary responsibility of states and
local governments." Based on the complexity and sometimes interstate nature
of air pollution problems, Congress also found "... that Federal financial
assistance and leadership is essential for the development of cooperative
Federal, State, regional and local programs to prevent and control air
pollution." Within this conceptual framework, the Act created the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and directed EPA to establish National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)—primary standards to protect public
health and secondary standards to protect public welfare. Following
establishment of an NAAQS, each state was required to develop a plan to assure
the standard was attained and maintained. For a plan to be approvable, it has
to include: (I) an analysis of current ambient and emissions data, (2) consi-
deration of alternative control strategies, (3) necessary rules and regulations,
-------
-3-
(4) appropriate source operating permits, (5) adequate authority and
resources to implement the plan and (6) opportunity for public parti-
cipation.
In 1971, EPA promulgated the first set of NAAQS. It included
standards
for sulfur dioxide (SC^), suspended particulate matter (TSP), carbon
monoxide (CO), photochemical oxidants (Ox), hydrocarbons (HC) and
nitrogen dioxide (N02). Since then EPA has reviewed and revised the
NAAQS. Table I shows the NAAQS as they currently exist. Table 2
provides a brief summary of effects of the six NAAQS upon health and
property.
TABLE 1.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
POLLUTANT
EXPOSURE
PRIMARY STANDARD&*> SECONDARY STANDARD&
Total Suspended
Particulates (TSP)
Annual Geometric Mean
24-hour maximum(a)(b)
75 ug/m3
260 ug/m3
60 ug/m3(c)
150 ug/m3
Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
Annual Arithmetic Mean
24-hour maximum(b)
3-hour maximum(b)
80 ug/m3(0.03 ppm)
365 ug/m3(O.I4 ppm)
No Standard
No Standard
No Standard
1300 ug/m3(0.5 ppm)
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8-hour maximum(b)
I-hour raaximum(b)
10 mg/m3(9 ppm)
40 mg/m3(35 ppm)
Same as primary
Same as primary
Ozone (Ox)
Maximum hourly average(d)
Nitrogen Dioxide (N02> Annual arithmetic mean
Lead (Pb)
Maximum arithmetic mean
per calendar quarter
235 ug/m3(0.12 ppm)
100 ug/m3(0.05 ppm)
1.5 ug/m3
Same as primary
Same as primary
Same as primary
(a) ug/m3 - means micrograms per cubic meter
mg/m3 - means milligrams per cubic meter
ppm - means parts per mi I I ion Darts
(b) Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
(c) As a guide to be used in assessing implementation plans to achieve the 24-hour standard.
(d) The standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with maximum
hourly average concentration above the standard is equal to or less than I, as deter-
mined by Appendix H, 40 CFR 50.
-------
-4-
TABLE 2.
Effects of Major Air Pollutants on Health and Property
POLLUTANT
HEALTH EFFECTS
PROPERTY EFFECTS
Total
Suspended
particulates
Sulfur Dioxide
Correlated with increased
bronchial and respiratory
disease, especially in young
and elderly.
Upper respiratory irritation
at low concentrations; more
difficult breathing at moder-
ate concentrations (3000mg/m*>.
correleated with increased
cardio-respiratory disease,
acute lung damage at high
concentrations.
Corrodes metals and concrete;
discolors surfaces; soils exposed
materials; decreases visibility.
Corrodes and deteriorates steel,
marble, copper, nickel, aluminum,
and building materials; causes
brittleness in paper and loss of
strength in leather; deteriorates
natural and synthetic fibers, "burns"
sensitive crops.
Carbon Monoxide
Physiological stress in heart Corrodes limestone and concrete
patients; impairment of psy- structures.
cho-motor functions, dizziness
and headaches at lower concen-
trations, death when exposed
to 1000 ppm for several "cjrs.
Irritates eyes, nose, thrcar; Deteriorates rubber and fabrics,
deactivates respiratory corrodes metals, damages vegetation.
defense mechanisms, damages
Iunas.
Nitrogen dioxide Combines with hydrocarbons
in the presence of sun I ight
to form photochemical smog,
irritates eyes, nose, throat,
damages lungs.
Lead
Primary concern with young
children. Vost pronounced
effects on nervous system
(damage may occur at low
levels)kidney system and
blood forming system thigh
levels may have severe and
sometimes fatal consequences
such as brain disease, palsy,
and anemia). 3lood levels
30mg deciliter are associated
with an impairment in cell
function.
Corrodes metal surfaces, deteriorates
rubber, fabrics, and dyes.
Injures slants through absorotion of
soil. Affects nervous system of grazing
animals.
Based upon monitoring through 1978, the areas in Table 3 were found to be
violating NAAQS. Table 4 shows the results of 1983 monitoring. A more
detailed presentation of historical trends and analysis of data is contained
in the 1985 Idaho Air Quality Annual Report, Part I—Air Monitoring Summary.
-------
-5-
TABLE 3.
Areas of Idaho Violating National Standards in 1978
S02 TSP
PRIM. SECT PRIM. SEC. Ox CO NOg. LEAD
Silver Valley x x x x x
Pocate11o x x x x
Soda Springs x x
Lew i ston x x
Boise x
TABLE 4.
Areas of Idaho Violating National Standards in 1983
S02 TSP
PRIM. SEC. PRIM. SEC. Ox CO NO; LEAD
Pocatello x(l) x(2)
Soda Springs x(3) x(4)
Lew i ston x(5) x
3oise x
(I) 12 square mile industrial area northwest of Pocatello.
(2) 336 square mile area from Schiller at the northwest to
Inkom at the southeast, including Pocatello.
(3) 4j square mile area encompassing Conda and the surrounding
industrial area.
(4) 96 square mile area encompassing Soda Springs, Conda and the
industrial area.
(5) Proposed for redesignation to secondary TSP nonattainment only.
Though there are still nonattainment areas, the improvement in air quality
is significant. In five years Idaho has gone from five areas violating
eight primary standards to four areas violating four standards. It is
also important to note that the size of two of those areas, i.e., Pocatello
and Soda Springs, has decreased by 96 percent and Lewiston has not violated
a primary standard for more than two years.
HOW DO WE KNOW ABOUT IDAHO'S AIR QUALITY?
Idaho's air quality is determined by a statewide monitoring network. In 1983,
45 pollutants were measured at 27 sites. Table 5 on page 5 shows where each
pollutant was measured. It should be noted that monitoring for particulate
matter less than 10 micrometers, PMjg, was very limited because a standard
method has not yet been published. As soon as a method and equipment become
available, a high priority will be given to expanding the PM|o network. In
addition, ozone was not monitored in 1983 because earlier results were very low.
The following sections briefly relate each NAAQS to air quality in Idaho:
Particulate Matter
The NAAQS for particulate matter applies to 'total suspended particulates.'
This means all particles in the air, regardless of size, are monitored.
Recognizing that particulate matter greater than 10 micrometer poses minimal
-------
TABLE 5.
1983 State Air Monitoring Network
LOCATION
Coeur d1Alone
5th & Lakeside
Kellogg
204 Oregon St.
Lew Iston
State Office Bldg.
Army COE Dike
Osburn
Radio Station
PInehurst
Elementary School
Smeltery!lie
Silver King School
City Hall
Ada County
9500 Overland Road
Boise
Fatrview & Liberty
16th & Front
115* 9th Avenue
401 N. Orchard
WInstead Park
Twin FalIs
Warehouse
Bannock County
Sewage Treat. Pit.
SImplof Plant
Butte County
Craters-of-the-Moon
INEL
Caribou County
Torgeson's Ranch
North of Conda
Harris Ranch
Beker Industries
Chubbuck
Elementary School
Inkom
Central Park
Pocatello
ISU
Soda Springs
Hospital
POLLUTANTS SAMPLED
TSP PMlQ LEAD SO; CO Ox N02 SPECIAL
NOK1HERN IDAHO
X
X
xf3)
SOtmiWESTERN IDAHO
x
X
xU)
x(5)
SOUTHEASTERN IDAHO
X
xC2)
x(2)
x(2)
23
I
(I) Hi-volume sampler with colocated precision sampler.
(2) Industry operated monitor, data reported to the State.
(3) 3-month sampling for heavy metals (lead, zinc and cadmium).
(4) Winter sampling to determine impact of wood stove emissions on neigh-
borhood levels of TSP, PM|Q and CO.
(5) Study of concentrations of pesticides in ambient air.
health risks because they do not penetrate into the alveolar region of the
lungs, the EPA proposed a new PM|Q standard on March 20, 1984. However,
until the PM|Q standard replaces the TSP standard, Federal regulations
require attainment and maintenance of the TSP standard.
-------
-7-
Sources of particulates in Idaho are classified as either 'point' or
'area' sources. Point sources are stacks or ducts emitting pollutants
from industrial processes. Point sources in Idaho have been regulated
for many years and as a result these sources are generally well controlled
by devices such as baghouses, scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators.
As Idaho's economy expands and new point sources are built, particulate
emissions will be controlled by more efficient devices. In areas where
NAAQS are not being met, new point sources will be required to 'offset'
any new emissions by a greater reduction of existing emfssjons.
Area sources are simply all non-point sources. Area sources include
particulate emissions from industrial roof vents and openings, storage
piles and unpaved roads, open burning, residential space heating, and
vehicles. Traditionally, area sources have been less controlled. How-
ever, given significant reductions of point source emissions, the contri-
bution of area sources is now likely the primary cause of violations of
the TSP standards in Idaho.
The control of particulate emissions from point sources by Idaho's
industries has enhanced air quality. However, in areas where problems
still exist, such as Pocatello and Soda Springs, improved operation and
maintenance of control equipment on point sources and better control of
area source emissions are still needed to meet national health standards.
As more wood is being used for residential heating, public concerns about
health impacts have been raised in Idaho and in other states where wood is
burned. It is known that wood smoke contains inhalable particulate matter
composed of cancer-causing agents. Studies are proceeding to determine
what concentrations and exposure to wood smoke pose unacceptable health
risks.
Sulfur Dioxide
National standards for S02 were not violated in 1983. In the past, there
were S02 violations in the Silver Valley and Pocatello. The principal
cause of S02 emissions in the Silver Valley was smelting and refining
lead and zinc ores by the Bunker Hill Company. Since curtailment of this
operation in late 1981, there have been no ambient S02 violations in the
Silver Valley. The major source of SC>2 emissions near Pocatel lo is
sulfuric acid production at the J.R. Simplot plant. Sulfur dioxide
emissions from this plant have been reduced sufficiently to meet ambient
S02 standards.
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide standards were exceeded in Ada County in 1983. The primary
cause was vehicle emissions. In response, the Ada Planning Association and
local Air Duality Board prepared a transportation control plan, including a
a mandatory inspection/maintenance program. The plan was submitted by the
-------
-8-
State to EPA as a formal revision to the Idaho State Implementation Plan.
The State will continue to monitor CO levels and provide technical assis-
tance to local government but implementation and tracking progress of the
current transportation control plan will be accomplished by local government.
Lead standards were met throughout Idaho in 1983. The primary source of
lead emissions was vehicles using leaded gasoline. Based on EPA actions
to phase-down or eliminate lead in gasoline, ambient lead level in Idaho
should remain well below national standards.
Prior to curtailment of lead and zinc smelter operation by Bunker Hill
Company in late 1981, the Silver Valley greatly exceeded ambient lead
standards. Since curtailment, the lead standards have not been exceeded.
However, in order to assure lead standards will be met if the smelter is
restarted, EPA is developing a plan which will limit emissions of lead
from the smelter complex.
-------
HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
BUREAU
-------
-10-
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Improper storage, collection, transportation, treatment and disposal of
sol id and hazardous waste are cause for concern. Some concerns are:
- public health hazards can occur
- environmental damage may result
rellance on land disposal gives a sense of false security
- resources and energy can be lost when materials are disposed
of rather than recycled
HAZARDOUS WASTE
The Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 provides
a mechanism by which Idaho can gain authority to completely manage
hazardous waste activities within its borders. The state has continued
to inspect and consult with hazardous waste generators, transporters,
treaters and disposers since the federal regulatory program began, but
final state authorization, including enforcement authority, has yet to
be obtained. A major step in the process to obtain authority was the
passage of the "Hazardous Waste Management Act of 1983" by the Idaho
Legislature and a 1984 amendment to correct an omission in the Act.
Those actions allowed the State to continue efforts to gain final authori-
zation, which is expected by December of 1985. Meanwhile, the program
will continue under a cooperative arrangement with the Environmental
Protection Agency.
In addition to hazardous wastes being regulated by the Resource Conser-
vation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
controls handling and disposal of PCB's and the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) controls the use of pesticides
used in Idaho agriculture.
Idaho is also involved with the Comprehensive Environmental Response
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as "Superfund".
Under this Act there is provision for a National Priorities List (NPL)
which is a listing of hazardous waste sites where known or suspected
releases of hazardous wastes have occurred or could threaten public health
or the environment. The 400 highest rated sites for response action are
to be designated, by law, as the top priority sites. Idaho currently has
one site on the "400 list": Bunker Hill Mining at SmelterviIle. Two other
sites, Pacific Hide and Fur Recycling Company and Union Pacific Railroad
Company, both at Pocatello, have been recommended for inclusion on the
NPL. Besides the NPL sites, Idaho has 107 sites on the ERR IS (Emergency
and Remedial Response Information System) list which is a part of the
"superfund" law. These are abandoned sites that have been reported from
a number of sources. The State, in cooperation with the district health
departments and other agencies, is preparing a preliminary assessment of
these sites. It will be determined (I) if they are, indeed, valid sites,
-------
(2) if the location identification is correct, (3) how much information is
available about the kind and quantity of hazardous wastes buried at a site and
(4) what the related problems are as well as who the legal property owners
area. Potential problem sites will be added to the list of sites requiring
further sampling and evaluation.
Adequate disposal capacity for Idaho's authorized hazardous waste gener-
ators exists at two commercial disposal facilities located in rural Owyhee
County. These sites receive wastes from Idaho sources as well as large
volumes of waste from sources outside the State. Questions about the
adequacy of the sites from a hydrogeologic standpoint are being investigated
in preparation for "Part B" permits.
Potential problems will remain, however, for less regulated small quantity
generators who normally use municipal landfills for waste disposal. There
have been instances of disposal site workers coming in contact with hazar-
dous waste because the local disposal sites are not equipped the handle
these types of wastes. The federal regulation presently requires control
of facilities generating 2200 pounds per month or accumulating 2200 pounds
at any time. This rate will probably be decreased to 220 pounds by 1986.
In FY 84 the Division began a survey to find out how many small generators
there are and began planning for adequate control measures.
The federal regulations require that facility inspections include review
and evaluation of facility plans to assure that the facilities:
- are prepared to handle hazardous waste,
- have a program to train their employees to handle hazardous waste,
- have contingency plans in place for emergency incident response,
- are prepared to take proper precautions when a land disposal
facility is closed and have made provisions for the site to be
monitored for a minimum of 30 years after closure, and,
- have financial assurance for personal liability and environmental
damage.
In FY 85 permitting actions will continue for hazardous waste land disposal
operations as well as treatment/final disposal for the two commercial
disposal faciIities.
Inspections of authorized facilities, actions on small quantity generator
requests for disposal, investigations of abandoned and/or unauthorized
hazardous waste dumps and resolving complaints from the general public
will continue.
RESOURCE RECOVERY
The economics of recycled materials are typically good in heavily populated
areas, but recycling programs in Idaho suffer from high transportation
costs and smaII voIumes.
-------
-12-
Some municipal wastes that can be recycled are aluminum cans, newspapers,
quality paper, cardboard, and glass. Much of the remaining waste can be
incinerated to generate energy as steam or electricity.
Existing and planned or potential resource recovery projects in Idaho are
described below.
- Cassia County was the first political entity in the state to plan,
develop and begin operating a full scale solid waste energy recovery
facility using municipal waste. The plant at Heyburn has a fifty
ton-per-day incinerator with a heat recovery boiler providing part
of the steam needs of the adjacent Simp lot potato processing plant.
- In Kootenai County the Coeur d'Alene sanitary landfill has been
retrofitted with a methane recovery system and is providing space
heating for the city's shop complex.
- In Lewiston, the Pot latch Forest Products Company has on line an
electrical generation complex that is powered by wood wastes.
- Bannock County has experienced some difficulties in securing
financing for their proposed energy recovery facility. Bannock
County has passed a bond election and proposes to build a 175 ton
per day energy recovery plant to co-generate process steam and
electricity.
- A feasibility study for an energy recovery plant for Payette County,
Idaho and Malheur County, Oregon, was completed by Hoi Iiday Engineer-
ing Company. The study disclosed that it would not be economically
desirable to build a plant at this time.
Other wastes with a potential for recovery include tires, lubricating oil
and wood waste. Each presents disposal problems. Discarded tires cannot
be compacted and gradually work to the surface in landfills where they
can trap water and become a breeding place for mosquitoes. Waste lubri-
cating oil has been used on roads as a dust suppressant but it can pollute
air and water. Heavy metals and other contaminants in the oil make
indiscriminate burning or disposal undesirable. Wood waste can pollute
water resources and consume significant space in landfills.
SOLID WASTE
Some of the problems related to solid waste disposal are:
- When garbage decomposes, methane gas is produced as a byproduct.
Methane is toxic to vegetation and is explosive in certain concen-
trations. It has been detected at some landfills in Idaho. Methane
gas problems can be reduced through proper site selections and
construction. When methane gas is present it can be used as an
energy source.
-------
-13-
FIGURE 1.
Location of Hazardous Waste and
Resource Recovery Facilities
^•k Chemical Treatment and Disposal Facilities
* Energy Recovery Plants
• Energy Recovery Plant Feasibility
Study Areas
• Recycling Facilities that Accept Two or
More Types of Material (different types
of paper, aluminum cans, glass, etc.)
-------
-14-
- Decomposition of refuse can produce offensive odors that may attract
rodents and insects capable of transmitting disease organisms.
Proper disposal and compaction of the refuse with daily soil cover
will reduce the problem.
- Sewage sludge disposal is of increasing concern as water pollution
control requirements for removal of wastes become more strict and
space for disposal becomes more scarce. Some alternatives being
used are incinerating the sludge or using it on farm and forest
lands.
The lack of funds has caused considerable reduction in the surveillance of
municipal solid waste disposal sites as well as continuation of the open
dump inventory.
When a city or county has one or more open dumps, usually these sites are
abandoned and sanitary landfills established or they are converted to
sanitary landfills for more adequate sanitary management. Unfortunately,
through improper management, a great many sanitary landfills are allowed
to become little more than open dumps; another complicating factor is that
establishing new sanitary landfills or extending them into adjacent areas
is not a process that can be completed in a matter of weeks. Planning,
public participation, technical reviews and formal legal processes require
a great deal of time from many months to several years when there are no
problems. When there are issues raised, usually because of the lack of
planning, the process may take one to several years and still not result
in a favorable resolution. In Idaho there seems to be a failure to fully
recognizd the significance of these time requirements. It is said that
"time waits for no man"; neither does refuse. If a fill is not available
to receive refuse when it is needed, the problems compound rapidly. One
or several legal actions may be initiated by different parties.
One of the major concerns associated with problem sites is water pollution.
Rainwater draining through or running over the wastes may carry harmful
chemicals and bacteria into streams and groundwater and can contaminate
wells and surface water used for drinking, cooking, swimming, and other
public contact activities. Groundwater monitoring is being conducted
at the solid waste disposal sites that have the highest potential for
causing problems.
Open burning of garbage in populated areas in Idaho has been virtually
eliminated, but there are still problem sites due to improper disposal
of municipal solid wastes.
Solid waste program activities include:
- locating open dumps (open dump inventory) and working with cities
and counties to upgrade open dumps to sanitary landfills,
- approving new disposal sites,
- maintaining the state solid waste plan,
-------
-15-
- inspecting disposal facilities,
- responding to public complaints and
- answering inquiries from industry and governmental entities.
Some of the program activities have been delegated to the district health
departments to conduct inspections and react to problems in their districts,
RADIATION CONTROL
The use of radiation sources in medical, industrial or academic fields can
be likened to a two-edged sword. If used properly they can be excellent
tools for medical diagnosis. Improperly used they have the potential to
cause ill health.
Radiation sources can be categorized as follows: ionizing radiation,
which has enough energy to cause intermolecular destruction, and non-
ionizing radiation.
Sources of non-ionizing radiation are microwave ovens, lasers, ultrasound
and diathermy equipment, radio frequency propagators (televisions,
computer terminals, etc.), and radar. The main areas of concern are use
of microwave ovens in homes and restaurants and use of lasers in public
displays, high schools and colleges. It is estimated that over 40% of
all homes and a much higher percentage of all restaurants now have micro-
wave ovens. About \% of the microwave ovens are found to be faulty
permitting excessive radiation leakage.
Ionizing radiation sources are classed into two categories: radioactive
materials and electronic radiatipn producing devices.
Radioactive material possession and use is controlled through Iicensure
and inspection by the Division's Radiation Control Section. Anyone wishing
to use certain types or quantities of radioactive materials must submit
an application for licensure, describe the proposed use and list their
qualifications and criteria for safe use. A license is issued and
inspections are conducted to verify that the user is complying with the
regulations.
Examples of use are: nuclear medicine facilities in hospitals where
radioactive tracers are injected into humans to detect cancer, blood
clots, etc., industrial radiography where pipelines or tanks are evalu-
ated for structural integrity, measurement of soil moisture content or
material density for highway construction and agricultural uses, indus-
trial gauges where thickness, density or level of a material is measured,
and research facilities.
Users of radioactive materials can lead to environmental contamination,
waste disposal and transportation problems even though precautions are
taken.
-------
-16-
The Idaho National Engineering Laboratory west of Idaho Fa I Is is a
facility operated by the federal government housing several active nuclear
reactors, a waste processing facility and a radioactive waste disposal and
temporary storage faciIity.
Monitoring of the environment must be conducted to ensure that people are
not being subjected to unnecessary radiation exposure through contamination
of the air, soil and groundwater.
Several years ago a uranium ore milling operation was conducted near Lowman,
Idaho. The mill and tailings piles were later abandoned. The uranium
level in the tailings piles is a potential health threat and action will
be taken over the next several years to cover the material and return the
site to its natural state.
Increased use of radioactive materials in both the nuclear and non-nuclear
fields has led to increased transportation and disposal of radioactive
materials. Idaho has entered into a compact with other northwest states
to assure that an adequate low level waste disposal site is chosen to
handle Idaho's radioactive waste.
Idaho is also participating in the national plan for selection of a final
waste disposal site for high level and transuranic wastes (refuse contami-
nated with small amounts of plutonium).
To combat the increasing probability of transportation accidents involving
radioactive materials and to lessen the potential health threats, the
Radiation Control Section has implemented a Radiation Emergency Response
Plan to react to accidents on Idaho's highways. This plan calls for the
Department to provide a response team, equipment and training for reaction
to a radiation incident.
Finally, electronic radiation producing devices encompass machines which
produce radiation when energized, namely x-ray units, electron microscopes
and x-ray diffraction units. Anyone wishing to possess or use such a
device must have the unit registered with the Radiation Control Section
within 10 days of acquisition. After registration the x-ray facility unit
is subject to inspection.
Inspections of x-ray equipment are conducted on a priority basis depending
upon the type of facility and workload involved. Busy facilities such as
hospitals and therapy installations and industrial radiography units are
inspected once every 18 months. Private medical and chiropractor x-ray
units, veterinarians, facilities with electron microscopes and industrial
x-ray units are inspected once every five years.
A major source of unnecessary radiation exposure comes from improper oper-
ation by the technician. User education courses have been provided for
x-ray unit operators and the Radiation Control Section has cooperated with
the local medical societies toward certification of the x-ray operators.
-------
-17-
VECTOR CONTROL
Vector control is concerned with the protection of the public from vector-
borne diseases and nuisance pests. Rodents, and insects and other
arthropods which are capable of transmitting diseases such as encephal-
itis, Colorado tick fever, relapsing fever, Rocky Mountain spotted fever,
plague, tularemia and other diseases are present in the State and disease
outbreaks do occur. General outbreaks of nuisance insects such as yellow-
jackets, flies, mosquitoes, head lice, black flies and stored food pests
are common.
The vector control program is one of consultation and technical assistance
to local communities, the public and agencies, especially the mosquito
abatement districts. There is a need to continually train people to deal
with these problems.
Problem areas which may complicate program delivery include:
- pest populations developing resistance to control chemicals,
- environmental concerns for pesticide applications,
- shortage of trained personnel to operate the programs and
- the acceptance by the public of new control methods.
-------
c *:---....v.iaj.... ... ~"' r> ——^5;
WATER
QUALITY
BUREAU
-------
-20-
WATER QUALITY
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
- What is the mission or goal(s) of the Water Quality Bureau?
- How Is it organized to best and most efficiently achieve
that goal?
- What are the principal activities the Bureau undertakes
to ach i eve Its goaI(s)?
There are three major activity areas which have application to all Water
Quality Bureau programs. These activities are monitoring, planning, and
enforcement. All water quality programs have their respective goals,
scope, and needs which are served by one or all of the principal activity
areas. Goals change as they are achieved and, therefore, so do the
activities that lead to their achievement. A summary of each activity
will be given, followed by separate discussions showing specific applica-
tions to the Drinking Water Supplies, Municipal Construction Grants,
Point Source Control and Nonpoint Source Control programs.
ACTIVITIES
MonI toring
Idaho's water quality monitoring program was developed in 1967 for the
primary purpose of establishing baseline conditions by which to measure
progress toward achievement of state and federal water quality goals.
The program was initiated with an ambient monitoring network, designed
to measure general water quality conditions on a broad scale and detect
gross changes or trends over time. Stations in the ambient network were
located in major drainage basins, on main tributaries, where significant
changes in land use occur, and on major interstate waterways. Special
and intensive surveys were also designed and conducted to answer specific
water quality questions on a smaller scale. As of October I, 1983, Idaho's
approach to water quality monitoring was revised to include only special
or intensive surveys. Special surveys usually address cause/effect
relationships and can be associated with either point source discharges
or nonpoint source activities.
Monitoring activities provide a method to verify, characterize and document
problem conditions among priority waterbodies or programs. Monitoring
results may be utilized in formulating corrective action plans for site
specific or program specific problems. The effectiveness of corrective
actions may be evaluated through changes in water quality conditions
detected by post-implementation monitoring.
-------
-21-
Plannlng
Many water quality planning projects in Idaho have been performed under
combined federal and state funding since 1975. Detailed project descrip-
tions can be found in Idaho's 208 Water Quality Management Plan and
subsequent updates. Planning projects most often focus on point source
or nonpoint source activity impacts, although some projects have been
undertaken to support the drinking water supplies or municipal construc-
tion grants programs. Projects may prescribe pollution controls on a
localized or statewide basis resulting in a variety of management plans
or strategies, policies/standards, proposed legislation, permit guidelines,
effluent limits, and information/education programs, Once developed, there
Is an ongoing need to evaluate and update prescribed control measures as
deemed necessary through review of monitoring or enforcement activities.
Enforcement
The Environmental Protection and Health Act of 1972 provides the authority
to protect Idaho's environment and promote public health. Through this
act rules, regulations, and standards are promulgated that afford specific
protection from classes of activities that may be environmentally damaging
and/or threatening to public health. The Environmental Protection and
Health Act provides for enforcement of the provisions of the act and all
rules and regulations pursuant thereto. Enforcement options include
administrative, civil, and criminal actions. Immediate injunctive relief
is also available in circumstances of imminent danger to public health.
The most comprehensive administrative rules relating to the protection of
water quality are the Idaho Water Quality Standards and Wastewater Treat-
ment Requirenents. Enforcement of these rules spans many program areas
and is probably the most significant single activity in achieving the
Bureau's water pollution control goals. There are also program specific
administrative rules that regulate certain kinds of activities which may
impact water quality. The protocol whereby enforcement actions are
pursued is described in the Division of Environment's Enforcement Proce-
dures Manual. This manual provides guidance to enforcement staff on the
proper procedure and timing for issuing notices of violation and requesting
enforcement action. Requests for enforcement actions are prioritized and
pursued by the Bureau's management and legal staffs.
PROGRAMS
Drinking Water Supplies
Goal: To ensure compliance with state and federal drinking water regulations.
Scope and status: The quality of Idaho's groundwater and surface water as
sources of drinking water supplies is generally good. Quality is occasion-
ally degraded by bacteria, seasonal turbidity, or localized contamination
from petroleum storage facilities and/or wastewater land treatment sites.
-------
-22-
Idaho's Drinking Water Program addresses source protection and safe
delivery among more than 2,700 community and non-community water systems.
Ninety percent of the total community and non-community water systems
derive drinking water from groundwater sources which are considered
potable without treatment. Because groundwater quality is generally
higher than surface water quality, treatment costs may be greatly reduced
in systems using groundwater. The remaining systems which utilize sur-
face water sources are more commonly located in northern Idaho.
Surface water sources of drinking water are generally protected under
the Idaho Water Quality Standards and Wastewater Treatment Requirements.
Because sources which meet all of the Standards' requirements are not
necessarily safe for use without additional treatment, Idaho Regulations
for Public Drinking Water Systems control and regulate the design and
operation of public water systems as well as the quality of water delivered
by these systems. Many systems do not currently furnish turbidity moni-
toring data as required by the regulations due to the expense involved.
Innovative funding sources should be sought for turbidity monitoring as
well as repair or replacement of existing equipment among many antiquated
systems.
Also essential to the proper operation and maintenance of water systems
is the availability of competent, trained systems personnel. There are
currently no federal or state funds being allocated for water systems
operator training purposes.
Municipal Construction Grants
Goal: To protect public health and improve water quality through responsible
obligation of state and federal funds for construction of community waste-
water collection and treatment facilities.
Scope and Status: Through FY83, approximately $206 million in federal,
state and local funds were expended for construction and improvements of
wastewater collection and treatment facilities within the state. Approxi-
mately one-half of Idaho's population is currently served by facilities
funded under this program.
Past emphasis within the municipal construction grants program has been
on designing facilities to meet specific effluent requirements for
secondary treatment and protecting public health. The emphasis has
diverted attention from the need to quantify actual impacts of municipal
discharges on receiving water quality, consequently, the water quality
data base used to assign funding priorities is limited. Factors currently
considered in determing project eligibility include service population,
development density, groundwater conditions, project cost, readiness-to-
proceed, public health, funding availability, and Federal Clean Water Act
requi rements.
Operation and maintenance continues to be a problem with grant funded
facilities. Although many communities have made a commitment to proper
operation and maintenance, some have not.
-------
-23-
Several efforts are underway to Improve O&M. The state now funds an
ongoing operator training program and is focusing on improving the local
commitment to proper funding of O&M. This is accomplished through a
financial capability analysis before a grant is issued. Prior to grant
closeout, EPA now requires the grantee to certify that the constructed
facilities perform to design expectations.
Effective with new grants on October I, 1984, the EPA share is being
reduced to 555? of the costs to construct a wastewater plant to serve
existing population. With the additional funds dedicated to the Water
Pollution Control Account by the 1984 Legislature, the state plans to
provide a match to the EPA share such that the local share wilI be main-
tained at about 25%. The state also plans to fund reserve capacity.
This reinstituted match to federal grants may, however, result in a
reduction in the dollars that can be spent on state-only funded projects.
Potnt Source Control
Goal: To insure that pollutant discharges comply with applicable state
and federal water quality regulations.
Scope and Status: The point source control program generally consists
of permitting, monitoring, inspection, and plan and specification review
in conjunction with various point source activities. Activities most
commonly regulated under Idaho's point source category include non-
construction grants funded facilities, industrial facilities, feedlots
and dairies, fish hatcheries, geothermal wastewaters and land application
sites. Pollutants generated by point sources most commonly include
bacteria and nutrients. The water quality impacts resulting from point
source discharges may be determined through intensive monitoring surveys
which are conducted as needed or indirectly through compliance data
reviews.
The major mechanism for control of point source discharges is the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), administered by the U.S.
EPA with coordinated review by the state. EPA's current policy provides
for regulation of "major discharges" only; however, greater than 75%
of Idaho's discharges are minor with cumulative impacts suspected to be
significant but unconfirmed to date. The state, therefore, is pursuing
delegation of the NPDES program and plans to address "minor" discharges
under its authorities. The major obstacles to state program delegation
are limited funding for administration and EPA's determination that the
state has insufficient penalty authority.
Nonpolnt Source Control
Goal: To eliminate or reduce adverse water quality impacts resulting
from nonpoint source activities to a level compatible with beneficial
uses of the affected waterbody.
-------
-24-
Scope and Status: The majority of Idaho's surface water quality problems
are associated with runoff from agricultural lands (irrigated and non-
irrigated cropland, grazing). This is partially due to the extensive
acreage devoted to agriculture in comparison to other nonpoint source
activities. Other nonpoint source activity subcategories include:
silviculture (.timber harvesting, reforestation, chemical application
and road Building), mining (active or abandoned, underground, surface
and dredge mining), construction (roads, recreational, homes and facilities,
dams, hydroelectric facilities, pipelines, bridges, flood and erosion
control structures), urban runoff (streets, roofs, sidewalks, and
parking lots), and residual waste disposal <|.andfills, septage/sIudge
disposal). Pollutants most commonly generated by nonpoint sources include
sediment, nutrients, bacteria and toxic chemicals.
Due to the widespread geographic distribution of nonpoint sources, their
highly variable characteristics and manpower limitations on enforcement
personnel, effective nonpoint source control is complicated and difficult.
Nonpoint source pollution is currently controlled through required
application of "approved" Best Management Practices (BMPs) or encouraged
application of BMPs lacking legislative approval. As such, application
of specific nonpoint source controls is essentially voluntary for activities
other than silviculture or residual waste disposal. Public education and
information programs which encourage BMP application are keys to the
overall success of current nonpoint source control efforts.
The availability of State cost-share funds to local Soil Conservation
Districts for application of agricultural BMPs provides additional incentive
for agricultural landowners and has proven quite effective in controlling
agricultural no'npoint source pollution problems. Idaho's agricultural
cost-share program provides technical assistance, information activities and
cost-sharing to farmers who install BMPs in high priority watersheds. Other
federal programs for installing BMPs include the Resource Conservation and
Development (RC&D) Program, Resource Conservation Act (RCA), and FHA
Conservation Loans. The RC&D monies are granted in designated RC&D areas
and involve such projects as critical area treatment and animal waste
system installation. Farms pool together to solve a joint problem under
this program. Some support for IDHW's nonpoint source control program is
provided through enforcement of the Idaho Forest Practices Act (Idaho
Department of Lands) and the Stream Channel Alteration Act (Idaho Depart-
ment of Water Resources). There are presently several projects underway
to refine and expand nonpoint source control requirements particularly
with respect to si Ivicultural activities.
QUALITY OF IDAHO'S PRINCIPAL RIVERS
Water quality conditions in Idaho's rivers vOry across the state. Conditions
can generally be related to the predominant land use in the area or the
extent of local development or both. The central and northern regions of
the state exhibit particularly high water quality. Geographic areas exper-
iencing degradation are the southeast, southwest, and the Palouse area of
-------
-25-
the Panhandle region. Rivers which are currently under study include the
Spokane River, Billingsley Creek, Rock Creek, Big Wood River, Salmon River,
and Blackbird Creek. Idaho can be broken down into six hydrologic basins
for a more detailed discussion of current stream conditions (Figure 2).
Water quality can be discussed following the flow direction of the major
drainages in the state, beginning in the southeast where the Snake and
Bear Rivers enter Idaho.
FIGURE 2.
Hydrologic Map of Idaho Showing High Priority Problem Areas.
Panhandle Basin
»•
Clear-water River Basin
Southwest Basin
Upper Snake River Basin
iar River Basin
-------
-26-
Table 6 Identifies and prioritizes water quality problem areas among Idaho's
six hydrologic basins. Where basin water quality management is split among
two Division of Environment Field Offices, separate lists for each office
appear under one basin heading.
Water bodies appearing on the basin lists have been targeted for management
action and are distinguishable from others in that basin because water
quality improvements have the greatest potential for: I) management success;
2) public benefit; 3) environmental benefit and 4) reducing the extent of
use impairment. Point and nonpoint source impacts are shown to the right
of each waterbody as percentage estimates of the total pollutant loading
to the waterbody.
Bear River Basin
Water quality in the Bear River Basin is rated poor. The major activities
impacting water quality are related to agriculture. Point sources of
pollution affecting basin water quality include municipal effluents from
Soda Springs and Preston. It is difficult to assess improvement or degrada-
tion of water quality in this basin as the natural flow of the Bear River
is closely regulated. Power generation is a primary use and diversions
for irrigation and return flows can readily mask true changes in water
qua Iity.
The beneficial uses of greatest concern in the Bear River Basin are
recreation and fishing. Bear Lake, the most significant hydrologic
feature in the basin, is a focal point for these activities. The Bear
River is the major-tributary to Bear Lake and therefore directly affects
lake water quality. Although present lake quality is very good, nutrient
and sediment loads from the Bear River present a very real threat. These
pollutants originate higher in the drainage and are associated with agri-
cultural activities and natural erosion of the river channel. A Clean
Lakes Project was completed early in 1983 which identified and quantified
the sources of pollutants entering Bear Lake. A series of management
alternatives for reducing pollution impacts from the adjacent watershed
and the upper Bear River drainage were proposed. Funding to implement
these solutions is being sought from the states of Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming.
Idaho has provided planning funds for the development of a basin water
quality management plan and Utah has provided funding for additional
monitoring activities and development of other management solutions.
Upper Snake River Basin
Overall water quality in the Upper Snake River Basin can be described as
fair. Quality is good as the Snake flows into Idaho from Wyoming; however,
progressive degradation occurs as the river flows west. Water quality
improves to a fair rating below Hagerman at the basin boundary. This is
partly due to the Snake Plain Aquifer discharge at Thousand Springs.
Agriculture is the predominant activity impacting water quality in the
Upper Snake River Basin. Irrigated and dryland agriculture on tributary
-------
-27-
TABLE 6.
Priority
Waterbodies
by Basin
BEAR RIVER BASIN
BB 430 Worm Creek
BB 471 Little Malad
BB 4503 Cub River
BB 10 Bear River
BB 120 Bear Lake and Outlets
UPPER SNAKE BASIN
(Twin Falls)
USB 840 Blllingsley Creek
USB BIO Deep Creek
USB 740 Cedar Draw Creek
USB 660 Magic Reservoir
USB — Groundwater; Cassia and
Twin FalIs Counties
(Pocatello)
USB Snake River Aquifer
USB 420 Portneuf River
USB 410 Portneuf River
USB 510 Rock Creek
USB 220 Island Park Reservoir
SOUTHWEST BASIN
SWB 270 Boise River
SWB 324 N.F. Payette River
SWB 310 S.F. Payette River
SWB 340 Payette River
SWB 233 Jordan Creek
SALMON BASIN
(Pocatello)
SB 421 Blackbird Creek
SB 430 Panther
SB 310 Lemhl River
SB 120 E.F. Salmon River
SB 110 Yankee Fork
(Boise)
SB 511 EFSF Salmon River
SB 441 Monumental Creek
CLEARWATER BASIN
CB 154 Potlatch River
CB 141 Lawyers Creek
CB 151 Big Canyon Creek
CB 156 Lepwai Creek
CB Moscow Aquifer
PANHANDLE BASIN
PB 20P Lake Pend Orel lie
PB 30P Lake Coeur d'AI one
PB 430S Hayden Lake
PB 420S Twin Lakes
PB 340P Priest Lake (East side
and tributaries)
SOURCES OF IMPACTS
NONPOINT SOURCES
Irrigated Agriculture
30$f
20$
10$
20$
60$
60$
20$
50-40*
20$
30$
50$
50$
10$
Dryland Agriculture
70?
70$
90$
20$
5$
30$
J0$
40$
50$
10*
35$
iOjl
40$
30$
75$
Q>
c
N
I
40$
75$
15$
10$
10$
15$
20$
50$
40$
10$
40$
10$
40$
50$
40$
5$
5$
5$
20$
Silviculture
10$
10$
15$
5$
10$
10$
10$
o>
c
c
z
10$
40$
100$
100$
30$
90$
75*
95$
5$
10$
25i
Road Construction
10$
10$
80$
20*
10*
?'5f
5$
5*
30$
15$
10$
General Construction
10$
5$
5$
20$
20$
90$
5$
5$
10$
5$
100$
«fr-
1
s.
c
to
.£>
i_
IS
10$
10$
5$
5$
5$
71<
Residual Haste Disposal
5$
5$
15$
5$
75*
75$d
Hydrologic Modification
5$
10$
5$
5$
L.
0
.C
s
I0$b
20$ f
I0$c
20$ b
20$b
I0$q
30$b
30$ b
lOJe
5$
5$
90$f
POINT
SOURCES
Municipal
J5$
10?
10?
20$
40?
I0<
5J
5$
"5t
Industrial
50$a
5$a
I0$a
lOOia
50-70$a
5$
5$
a - Land Application
b - Feedlots and Dairies
c - Fish Hatcheries
d - Subsurface Sewage Disposal
e - Natural Channel Instability
f - Upstream Sources
-------
-28-
rivers and the main stem Snake both contribute to degraded conditions.
Major point source discharges to surface waters within the basin include
the cities of Idaho Falls, Pocatello, Twin Falls, and Burley; industrial
discharges from FMC and numerous fish hatcheries. Several of these muni-
cipal ities and industries converted to land application either in part or
totally in 1980, which resulted in improved water quality.
The beneficial uses of greatest importance in the Upper Snake River Basin
are recreation, cold water fisheries and salmonid spawning. Pollutant
categories presenting the greatest threat to uses are bacteria, nutrients,
and suspended sediment. Nonpoint source activities contribute the majority
of these pollutants; however, point source discharges add to degraded
conditions. Improvement in these specific pollutant categories has been
shown in the Rock Creek watershed due to the application of Best Manage-
ment Practices (BMPs).
Removal of some surface discharges from the Portneur River has also
resulted in improved conditions for specific categories. This illustrates
that successful implementation of both point and nonpoint source controls
can protect or enhance existing and threatened beneficial uses.
Southwest Basin
Water quality conditions in the Southwest Basin have changed very little
since last reported. General conditions basin-wide can be characterized
as fair. Major tributaries to the Snake River within this basin contribute
high levels of bacteria, nutrients, and suspended sediment, reflecting the
extent of agricultural development. There are also numerous point source
discharges scattered throughout the basin which contribute to generally
degraded conditions. The Lower Boise River exhibits particularly poor
water quality conditions due to the extensive agricultural activities
within the drainage. There are also several major point sources discharging
to the Boise River. These include the cities of Boise, Meridian, Caldwell,
and Nampa; however, all these cities provide secondary treatment or better
and meet water quality standards with respect to their discharge. Meridian
generally discharges to Five-Mile Creek, a tributary to the Boise River.
In general, water quality is degraded from fair at the eastern basin border
to poor at the western border due to a combination of point and nonpoint
sources. As the Snake River flows north through Brownlee, Oxbow, and Hells
Canyon Reservoirs fair quality is restored through the settling of sediment
and associated pollutants in the reservoirs.
Water quality conditions indicate seasonal impairment to cold water biota
and salmonid spawning, particularly in the Boise River drainage. Impairment
to recreational uses also occurs in several area reservoirs. It Is hard to
separate the amount of use impairment caused by point sources versus non-
point sources, as both are significant and they occur together. The
greatest water qua Iity benefits to be realized in this basin would result
from improving land management practices relating to agricultural activities.
-------
-29-
Salmon Basin
The Salmon River drainage represents one of the last Inland wild anadro-
mous fisheries in the contiguous United States, therefore a priority has
been established to maintain the high quality stream conditions necessary
to support this unique resource.
Water quality within the basin is generally good with the exception of
localized year-round mining impacts. SiIvicultural and recreational
impacts may be detected seasonally. The streams most heavily impacted
by mining include: Monumental Creek, East Fork South Fork Salmon River,
Sugar Creek, Thompson Creek, Blackbird Creek, Big Deer Creek and Panther
Creek. Although scattered siIvicultural and recreational impacts are
limited by access, the cumulative effects of these activities are believed
to be significant. In particular, the recreational pressures on the Salmon
River during summer months is suspected to cause elevated bacterial con-
centrations on both the middle and main forks.
Clearwater River Basin
Water quality in the Clearwater Basin is generally good. Pollution impacts
are primarily nonpoint source in nature although there are several muni-
cipal dischargers in the lower drainage. SiIvicultural and agricultural
activities are the greatest potential threats to water quality in this
basin. The Clearwater drainage is an important recreation area and supports
both hatchery and wild anadromous fisheries. Close attention will be paid
to the effects of timber production and agriculture activities to assure
current high water quality conditions are maintained.
Panhandle Basin
The Panhandle Basin contains some of the highest quality natural environ-
ments in Idaho. These excellent conditions are reflected in both current
and historical water quality measurements in the Kootenai and Pend Oreille
River drainages. The Coeur d'Alene drainage is also very scenic; however,
water quality conditions in a major part of the basin continue to suffer
the effects of mining activities on the South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene
River. The major problem continues to be the high heavy metals concentra-
tions resulting from current and abandoned mining operations. Since the
closure of the Bunker Hill Mining and Smelting Complex in 1982, a measurable
improvement in metals has occurred. Use impairment continues, however, and
includes recreation, coldwater biota and salmon id spawning. Water quality
impacts from heavy metals remain detectable as far downstream as Long Lake,
Washington. Above the confluence of the Coeur d'Alene River and the South
Fork, at EnaviIle, water quality continues to be excellent.
There are several other sources or activities within the basin which have
the potential for degrading water quality. Nonpoint source activities
include silviculture, agriculture, and grazing. The few substantial point
sources, other than mining, include the municipal discharges from Coeur
d'Alene and Sandpoint.
-------
-30-
QUALITY OF IDAHO LAKES
Idaho's lakes are one of its most important recreational resources.
Most natural lakes exhibit excellent water quality while some of the
large river impoundments are experiencing significant degradation.
Figure 3 shows the principal recreational lakes in the state and ratings
of their condition for various recreational uses.
FIGURE 3.
Principal Recreational Lakes in Idaho and a Ranking
of Their Condition
SURFACE
AREA
NAME (ACMES)
Brownlee Res. 15.000|
American Falls Res. 56.000|
Wilson Lake 600J
LakeWalcott 12.000
Portneuf Res. 1.500J
William Lk /Lemhi Co. 200
Crane Creek Res. 1.000
Lake Lowell 9.600
Lower Granite Res. 8.900J
Oxbow Res. 1.500
Hell's Canyon Res. 2.500
Paddock Valley Res. 1.000
Fernan Lake 300
Chatcolet Lake ' 600
Cascade Res. 30.000
Henry's Lake 2.500
Island Park Res. 7.000
Magic Res. 1.800
Twin Lakes/Kootenai Co. 850
Cocolalla Lake 800
Salmon Falls Cr. Res. 1.500
Lower Goose Cr. Res. 1.000
Fish Cr. Res. 250
Lost Valley Res. 800
Palisades Res. 16.000
Upper Payette Lk. 500
Dworshak Res. 1 7.000
Sage Hen Res. 300
Anderson Ranch Res. 4.000
Alturas Lake 1.200
Lucky Peak Res. 2.800
Arrowrock Res. 4.000
Priest Lake 24.000
Lake Pend Oreille 94.000
Lake Coeur d'Alene 30.000
Hayden Lake 4.000
Payette Lake 1.000
Deadwood Res 3.000
Redfish Lake 1.500
Bear Lake 25.000
Spirit Lake 1.300
Upper Priest Lake b.OOO
Bulltrout Lake 900
Mackay Reservoir 1.000
Little Camas Res. 1.000
Little Wood Res 600
CAUSE OF PROBLEM
Upstream Sources
Natural/Agnc. Nonpomt/
Municipal/Industrial Pt. Sources
Upstream Sources
Upstream Sources
Agncultrual Runoff
Recreational Impacts
Natural/Agnc. Runoff
Agricultural Runoff
Upstream Sources
I Upstream Sources
Upstream Sources
Natural/Agnc. Runoff
I Septic Tanks/Agric. Runoff
(Agricultural Runoff
JAgric. Runoff/Munic. Pt. Source
I Recreational Impacts
Septic Tanks/Natural Runoff
Agnc. Runoff/Mumc. Pt. Sources
Septic Tanks/Agric. Runoff
Agnc. Runoff/Rec. Impacts
Condition Good
Moderate Problem
Significant Problem
Status Unknown
-------
-31-
AlI lakes undergo a natural process of aging known as eutrophication.
When this process is accelerated by man's activities it is termed
cultural eutrophication. Cultural eutrophication results when excessive
nutrients and sediment are supplied to lakes from outside sources. Land
disturbing activities such as agriculture, mining, silviculture and
construction are the main nonpoint sources of lake pollution. Municipal
and industrial treatment plant discharges are primary point sources of
lake pollution. If the impacts from these pollution sources are left
uncontrolled, the Iifespan of many Idaho lakes will be shortened signi-
ficantly.
There are several symptoms of eutrophication that are easily recognized.
Excess nutrients serve to "fertilize" lake systems and result in dense
growths of aquatic plants (algae). Some algae form floating mats which
prevent recreational uses such as swimming, boating and fishing. Aesthetic
value is also reduced by poor water clarity resulting from dense algal
growth and sedimentation. Another characteristic of eutrophic lakes is
low dissolved oxygen concentrations. When algae die and decay, oxygen is
consumed. Sometimes so much oxygen is used that fish kills occur and other
aquatic life becomes threatened. These conditions are eventually exhibited
during the natural aging process of all lakes, but under man's influence
they are amplified and accelerated.
Most of the eutrophication problems in Idaho lakes are due to increases
in nutrient levels from agricultural return flows and runoff, as well as
heavy development of lake shorelines (septic tank leaching). Examples of
deteriorated lake quality are Brownlee and Oxbow Reservoirs, impacted by
upstream agricultural activities along the Snake River and its tributaries.
Lake Lowell, an offstream reservoir near Boise, is impacted by high summer
nutrient loadings from agricultural nonpoint sources and a large population
of waterfowl that uses the lake. The waterfowl impact is significant enough
that control of agricultural nutrient sources may not solve the problem.
American Falls Reservoir is impacted from dryland and irrigated agriculture,
winter discharges of treated sewage from the city of Pocatello, and natural
phosphate deposits in the underlying geology. Many Northern Idaho lakes
which currently exhibit high quality are showing signs of degradation. These
lakes are used extensively for recreation and are undergoing increasing
development. To insure that future development occurs with minimal impact
on these lakes, management plans for Kootenai County Lakes and Pend Orel Ile
Lake have been developed. Planned growth and development around Idaho lakes
and improved land use practices are the first necessary steps for protecting
our valuable lake resources.
Funding to address lake water quality problems has been through the Water
Quality Management Planning Program and the Clean Lakes Program. Two Clean
Lakes Projects were completed before funding was discontinued in 1981. A
Lake Classification Study was completed by the University of Idaho in 1983.
The study resulted in a method of classifying lakes according to their
trophic condition or "health" and a method of ranking lakes according to
their need for management action. The second project was a diagnostic and
feasibility study on Bear Lake. This study documented and characterized
-------
-32-
the extent of water quality problems in Bear Lake, the adjacent watershed
and the upper Bear River watershed. Specific management solutions were
recommended for protecting and maintaining Bear Lake's water quality.
Other funding sources are being pursued to implement the findings of both
of these projects.
Lakes which are currently under study include Black Lake, Coeur d'Alene
Lake, and Pend Ore!lie Lake, all in the Panhandle Basin of Northern Idaho.
QUALITY OF IDAHO'S GROUNDWATER
Idaho's groundwater quality is generally good, with the exception of "back-
ground" or natural pollutants. Localized contamination as a result of man's
activities is also know or suspected to be occurring in the problem areas
shown in Figure 4.
Sole
Source Aquifer
FIGURE 4.
Groundwater Problem Areas
Agricultural contamination - injection wells
Elevated Heavy metals (mining)
Elevated Nitrates (septic tanks)
Reported petroleum problems
Septic tanks
Spills other than petroleum
Impoundments
Land disposal of wastewater
LandfilIs
Proposed Sole Source Aquifer
-------
-33-
Groundwater Is naturally stored in permeable geologic formations called
"aquifers". The ability of the soils surrounding an aquifer to transmit
water affects pollution potential and well production capacity. In
Southern Idaho, for example, porous geology can result in almost direct
flow of fluids injected from the surface into the Snake River Plain aquifer.
Disposal wells are commonly used in the area to inject various waste fluids,
such as excess irrigation water and urban runoff. The volume of waste
discharged to the extensive Snake River Plain, however, is not presently
significant. In Northern Idaho, the Rathdrum Prairie-Spokane Valley
(Eastern Washington) aquifer was designated a sole source aquifer in 1978
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in response to a petition by
the local citizens. The EPA felt that based on available information,
this aquifer was the only drinking water source for the area, and that
other sources (i.e. surface waters) could not be reasonably or economically
developed. The "sole source" designation gives the Rathdrum Prairie-
Spokane Valley aquifer a degree of special protection; any project devel-
oped over the aquifer using federal financial assistance is subject to
extensive EPA review. The Snake River Plain aquifer is currently under
consideration by EPA for a "sole source" designation also.
The goundwater resource in Idaho is used mainly as a source of domestic
water and for irrigation supplies. There are also some areas where ground-
water is used for industrial purposes. The Snake River Plain aquifer
discharges through numerous springs in the Twin Falls to Hagerman area
along the Snake River, and these springs have been developed extensively
for aquaculture. Other industries use the groundwater resource in Idaho
for cooling or processing water. Future uses of the groundwaters of Idaho
will primarily be as sources of domestic water supply. As development and
population growth continue, limitations on surface waters will lead to even
greater emphasis on utilizing the groundwater resource. Irrigation demands
especially will increase as agricultural lands farther from surface water
sources are developed. In addition, industrial use of groundwater will
continue to be significant, especially in the food processing industry.
The Division is currently developing standards for groundwater quality
protection. The standards will initiate a statewide groundwater quality
management strategy which was developed earlier this year.
-------
|